BHAVNABEN P. BHRAMBHATT Vs. NITIN LALLUBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Civil Revision Application is preferred by the applicant under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for the purpose of challenging the legality and validity of an order dated 22.3.2018 passed below Exh.70 by the learned 3rd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar in Regular Civil Suit No.146/2013 whereby amendment requested came to be rejected.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the original defendant is holding suit property being plot No.413 admeasuring 330 square meters situated in Section 8 came to be allotted to the original owner Shri Natvarsing Solanki was the Member of the Parliament under the Policy of the Government. The allotment took place but the said Shri Natvarsing Solanki had passed away on 20.06.2005. After his death, the plot came to be transferred in the name of legal heirs and the construction was put up having requisite permission from the competent authority and by way of registered sale documents on 15.9.2006 sold to original plaintiff. However, in the meantime, somewhere in the year 2001 since the plaintiff was in touch with the defendant i.e. present petitioner and there was matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and her husband, she alongwith children were residing at Ahmedabad and later at Mehsana. When the process of transfer was going on, present petitioner has requested to give come accommodation on humanitarian ground but then it is the case of the petitioner that a Regular Civil Suit No.218/2004 came to be filed in Civil Court at Gandhinagar for protection of possession which went in dismiss for non-prosecution and the plaintiff then was constrained to move present suit for recovery of possession and also filed an application for seeking temporary injunction below Exh.5. It is the case of the petitioner that summons was issued in the suit, defendant appeared, submitted Written Statement at Exh.18 and after considering the pleadings, the defendant prayed for dismissing the suit on the ground that the plaintiff is not lawful and bonafide purchaser of the suit property. The issues were framed and the suit is at the stage of cross examination of plaintiff but in view of the fact that, several material facts deserve to be disclosed and which has come up from Written Statement, the defendant herein moved an application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure below Exh.70 for seeking amendment in the Written Statement. The application was submitted with a view to see that correct facts be led before the Court so as to felicitate the ultimate proper conclusion in accordance with law and the plaintiff according to the defendant has suppressed material facts and the said facts were to be incorporated. Resultantly, the application was submitted.

(3.) The petitioner further states that said application came to be dismissed vide order dated 22.3.2018 which is made the subject matter of present revision petition u/S.115 of the Code.